Hi Paolo, Paolo Abeni a écrit : > hello again, > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Julien Kerihuel > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I only have one comment/thought regarding the private_data pointer >> assignation within the Subscribe call. >> > [...] > > >> I think adding a small assessor such as get_notification_private_data >> could be useful in this latter case. In the meantime, no show-stopper >> for me, just want to keep it in mind upon really needed. >> > > Ok, it seams very reasonable to me. Must I resend the patches, adding a: > > get_notification_private_data(mapi_session_t* session, int subscribe_id); > > public function ?!? > > BTW do someone have some comments regarding this patch: > > http://mailman.openchange.org/pipermail/devel/2009-April/001228.html > > ? > > Should I open a related track issue? I'm sorry if I'm a bit too > pressing, I only want to avoid that the patch is lost. > > Opening a track ticket is a good way for keeping history on an issue. Please, feel free to do so.
> Cheers, > > Paolo > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.openchange.org/listinfo/devel > Cheers, -- Ali Mdidech OpenChange Project http://www.openchange.org/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.openchange.org/listinfo/devel
